Cloud Computing Consultations with Australian Government

Greetings from the CSIRO Labs at Black Mountain in Canberra, where the Australian Government is consulting members of the computing profession on a cloud computing protocol. Previously this was to be called a "code" but that has a specific meaning under the Telecommunications Act. The idea is to provide a set of requirements which cloud computing providers would adhere to, to make consumers more confident as to what service they were going to get. Obvious issues include the privacy of the consumer's data and the reliability of the service. There is a National Cloud Computing Strategy from government and media release on the Australian Computer Society's involvement. Roland Padilla is researching this topic for his PHD at University of Melbourne and is sharing some preliminary results with us.

The Institute of IT Professionals NZ is ahead of Australia, having issued a "New Zealand Cloud Computing Code of Practice" (June 2012). This is a voluntary code and is mostly about disclosure to the client of the cloud provider's service delivery standards.

Also a draft "Australian Government Cloud Computing Strategic Direction Paper" was released for comment (deadline 31 January 2011). Glenn Archer, Acting Australian Government Chief Information Officer, has released a "Draft Report on Cloud Service Provider Certification Requirements for the Australian Government" for comment. The report recommends expanding the Data Centre as a Service (DCaaS) Multi Use List (MUL) to include cloud services and "cloud like" services. In the longer term the draft Australian Government Commercial Service Provider Assurance Framework would be extended to encompass cloud services.  Also the report recommends looking at the "National Standing Committee on Cloud Computing" (NSCCC) an industry body and the New Zealand Cloud Computing Code of Practice and the CSA Security, Trust and Assurance Registry (STAR) Program.

The period for comments on the ACS Cloud Computing Consumer Protocol - Discussion Paper have been extended to Monday 9 September 2013. Comments can be sent by email.

The Australian Computer Society (of which I am a member)  is making a considerable contribution of resources to helping the Australian Government. Hopefully the Australian Government will similarly put in resources to see something of value to the community. Previously the ACS assisted PM&C with consultations, including arranging a meeting in Canberra, 18 October 2011, which I attended. However, the Australian Government later abandoned work on this, without any public explanation, thus wasting the time of the many ACS members, including myself, who contributed and failing to adequately protect national security (I proposed a Australian CyberWarfare Battalion to address this).

Government Online Engagement

Greetings from the Department of Finance in Canberra, where I am taking part in an "Online engagement course for the APS". The idea is to give public servants the skills and guidance to engage on-line, with a strategic approach by agencies. Having run several such workshops for government and as a formal university course, I was invited along. At the moment I am looking at how to teach professional skills online and some of these may be of use for the public service.

In my ICT Sustainability course I have students discuss the topic on-line each week. It takes several weeks for the students to establish a balance between the informality of an on-line forum and the need for academic rigor. Public servants will similarly need to balance the norms of the social media forums they are using and the legal and other requirements of government.

Online Engagement Courses for Government

The Department of Finance is considering a series of short courses on social media for the Australian Public Service ("Proposed online engagement courses for the APS", Pia Waugh, AGIMO Blog, 7 March 2013). These are to give APS the skills to engage online with and foster a more strategic strategic approach by agencies. Input and collaboration is invited from agencies and organizations. Based on experience of having run several such workshops for government and a formal university course (as well as spending the last year studying how to teach professional skills), would be to develop the courses for pure on-line delivery and use that material for the live workshops. The on-line versions of the courses could be made freely available for use, perhaps even as MOOCs.

Each course would include relevant information, resources, discussion and hands-on experience. Attendees could work through a number of hypothetical situations (including their own if they wish) and develop new skills that could be applied immediately in their agency.

Course 1: Using social media in the public service
This course would likely cover the following:

• An introduction to social media – adapting to the changing expectations of the public, and some lessons learnt from leading case studies from around Australia.
• Understanding online engagement – the difference between broadcast, consultation, co-development and customer service. How to determine the right approach, tone, tools and strategy for any situation.
• Online community development – how to build a constructive and useful online community of participation with social media.
• Professional versus personal – finding the balance for public servants. Will include best practise social media policies and management.
• Building a public narrative – the importance of “filling the vacuum” with facts, evidence and credible sources. The imperative to be an authoritative source of knowledge in the face of myriad agendas.
• Dealing with online conflict – how to mitigate risk, be on the front foot and tame the trolls.
• Iterative policy – how to monitor, measure and iteratively improve your social media approach, to be able to respond quickly and effectively to new opportunities and challenges.
• Monitoring social media (for individual users, topics, groups) – how to keep across the news in your area of interest.
• Where to from here – support mechanisms, other training and skills development options, existing policies, precedent principles resulting from public sector engagement in Australia to date.

Course 2: Managing social media in your organisation and developing an online engagement strategy
This course would likely cover the following:

• Existing strategies – learning from the strategies employed by leading case studies across the APS.
• Monitoring social media – following your brand, creating notifications, identifying problem areas, how to track trends, themes and sentiment of online discussions.
• Appropriate strategies for specific goals – the difference between broadcast, consultation, co-development/crowdsourcing and customer service, and specific strategies for each. Mapping goals to tools.
• Managing your staff online – how to find the delicate balance between mitigating risk and encouraging the productive use of social media by your staff. Practical strategies, policies and how to deal with issues.
• Analysis tools – how to get the most of social media data, mapping your participating communities, how to identify if you are being “gamed”.
• Building a strategy – mapping your goals, communities, resourcing, developing appropriate success criteria.
• The role of “apps” and mobile computing in your social media strategy. ...

From: "Proposed online engagement courses for the APS", Pia Waugh, AGIMO Blog, 7 March 2013

Australian Government Cloud Service Provider Certification

Glenn Archer, Acting Australian Government Chief Information Officer, has released a "Draft Report on Cloud Service Provider Certification Requirements for the Australian Government" for comment. The report recommends expanding the Data Centre as a Service (DCaaS) Multi Use List (MUL) to include cloud services and "cloud like" services. In the longer term the draft Australian Government Commercial Service Provider Assurance Framework would be extended to encompass cloud services.  Also the report recommends looking at the "National Standing Committee on Cloud Computing" (NSCCC) an industry body and the New Zealand Cloud Computing Code of Practice and the CSA Security, Trust and Assurance Registry (STAR) Program.

Australian Government Cloud Computing Guidelines

The Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO) and National Archives of Australia has released a series of cloud computing guides for comment. But there are so few suitable government applications for cloud computing, that perhaps the guides should concentrate on those. The cloud technology could be applied within computer systems under government control, but generally government data (and the data the government holds about its citizens) is not suitable for placing on a distributed, shared, global computer system.

1. Privacy and Cloud Computing for Australian Government Agencies PDF 255KB
2. Negotiating the Cloud – Legal Issues in Cloud Computing Agreements PDF 395KB
3. Financial Considerations for Government use of Cloud Computing PDF 236KB
4. Records Management and the Cloud, National Archives of Australia website.

New Australian Government Information Security Procedures

The Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, discussed the new approach to Australian Government information security policy July 2011. The Australian Government Protective Security Policy Framework is available on-line. The Australian Government Information management Office (AGIMO) has provided an Email Protective Marking Standard for the Australian Government to implement the security policy:

This Standard defines the format of protective markings for Internet email message headers used for messages exchanged within and between Australian Government agencies. A protective marking is used to convey the protection requirements for information in a message, as defined within the Australian Government Protective Security Policy Framework. The protective marking may
also contain additional information about the message that tells systems and system users how to appropriately disseminate the information contained in the message.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction
   1. Document Terminology and Conventions
   2. Audience
   3. Pre- and co-requisite reading
   4. Assumptions
2. The Standard
   1. Scope
   2. Out of Scope
   3. Version
   4. Namespace
   5. Syntax of the Protective Marking
3. References
4. Appendix A
   1. Change Log
   2. Conventions used in this document
5. Appendix B
   1. Registration of Message Header with IANA
   2. Examples

Example

A message containing SECRET information, that is ACCOUNTABLE MATERIAL and which
can only be released to AUSTEO members

From: neville.jones@ato.example.org
To: alice@example.org
Message-ID: <4214543637754743747347745@ato.example.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: This is an example subject line [SEC=SECRET,
CAVEAT=ACCOUNTABLE-MATERIAL, CAVEAT=AUSTEO]
This is an example message body.
Bye,
Neville

Where are the Open Access Guidelines for Australian Government?

The Creative Commons for Government Seminar is covering much useful ground. But what seems to be missing are formal prominent guidelines on open access in the Australian Government. The Attorney-General’s Department (AGD) issued Draft Guidelines on Licensing Public Sector Information for Australian Government Agencies in early February 2011. Comments were collected during February, but I can't see where the finalized document was issued.

AGIMO cover open access well in their Web Guide mandatory requirements for "Copyright & copyright notices". There is a reasonably clear statement in the Attorney-General’s Department "Commonwealth Copyright Administration", but buried down in the text :

In line with a recommendation of the Government 2.0 Taskforce Report, Commonwealth Government agencies are now required to release copyright public sector information under Creative Commons BY-licences or other open content licences, wherever possible.

While I was looking for what might be the official statement, Professor Anne Fitzgerald mentioned the "Intellectual Property Principles for Australian Government agencies". This has a statement in paragraph 11 (a). But this is not easy to find:

11. (a) Agencies should encourage public use and easy access to material that has been published for the purpose of :
    • informing and advising the public of government policy and activities;
    • providing information that will enable the public and organisations to understand their own obligations and responsibilities to Government;
    • enabling the public and organisations to understand their entitlements to government assistance;
    • facilitating access to government services; or
    • complying with public accountability requirements.

This includes all materials which agencies are generally obliged to publish or otherwise allow free public access to. This material may also be described as ‘public sector information’. It does not necessarily include materials that have been published for commercial purposes. Nor does it cover materials which are of a sensitive nature, such as information that impacts on national security or information which would destroy the possibility of subsequently obtaining patent protection where such protection is necessary to achieve public benefit.

Permission for public use and re-use of such material should generally be given royalty free and on a non-exclusive basis.

Exclusive licences to use such materials should only be given in exceptional circumstances. ...

ICT in the Australian Government

Greetings from the Australian Computer Society meeting in Canberra, where John Sheridan, First Assistant Secretary, Australian Government Information Management Office is talking on "Moving from Efficiency to Productivity". Jon paraphrased Peter Drucker, saying that productivity was not about making workers work harder, but managers manage better. John is a frequent contributor to the AGIMO Blog. John pointed out the the Gershon initiatives have now mostly been completed successfully.

Later work has been on the "COTS/GOTS" emphasizing the use of off the shelf applications with the minimum of customization. I see there was a ICT Customisation and Bespoke Development Policy, released October 16, 2009. John pointed out that common applications required common business processes and that this should be driven by the business, not the IT operations.

AGIMO released a Australian Government Cloud Computing Strategic Direction Paper on 14 Apr 2011. John pointed out that government's data storage is not "elastic" in that data is added, but not deleted for a very long time. As a result the ability of the "cloud" to rapidly increase and reduce data storage is not as applicable for government.

A revised Australian Government Open Source Software Policy was released on 27 January 2011. John argued that "Apps" for smart phones were more important to government than "open source". It was not clear what the connection, if any, between open source and apps was. Apps can be open source, or not. In my view organizations should look to build portable web based applications for mobile devices, before considering "apps". The difference is that a web application will run on desktop and laptop computers as well as smart phones and tablet computers. "Apps" will only run on the mobile platform they were designed for (usually Apple iPhone/iPad or Android). In most cases it would be unacceptable for government to limit the services it provides to those who just have Apple iPhones or just Android phones or even both.

The part of John;s talk which prompted the most audience questions was that of wide area network gateways. AGIMO has conducted a rationalization of government connections to the Internet.

John mentioned that Benchmarking for ICT will be released in about a month. Also green ICT benchmarks will be released as part of the overall sustainability. What I was not clear on was where the results of the ICT Sustianability inaitiaves are published. Each angeny is required to publish their results in their annual report, but are these consolidated somewhere in an overall government report? This information would be very useful for my ICT Sustainability students.

There is also "Programme and Project Management Maturity Model" (P3M3TM) reporting. John pointed out that all agencies do not have to have the top maturity raking to be doing a good job.

Work is proceeding on the Whole-of-Government ICT Services Panel (WISP) for 2012.

ICT Management SIG

AGIMO Update

AGIMO’s Vision & Plan for ICT in Government

John will discuss the status of current whole of government initiatives, including timeframes and outcomes, as well as how government is working with industry to deliver in the future.

John will talk about the role of AGIMO and how it continues to evolve to meet the changing demands of government.

Biography:

John Sheridan

First Assistant Secretar

John is currently the First Assistant Secretary Agency Services within AGIMO. His division’s responsibilities include whole of government matters such as australia.gov.au, Government 2.0, data centre strategy, coordinated procurement, improvements in the ICT industry marketplace, and telecommunications services including ICON, the Ministerial communications and telepresence networks.

John was also in charge of negotiating the Microsoft Volume Sourcing Agreement, valued at over $250m and providing services for over 230,000 staff and to successfully lead the effort to save $1 billion in ICT expenditure over 2009-2013.

Prior to this, John spent 22 in the Australian Army before joining and holding several senior roles within the ICT arm of Defence.

Plan Government ICT

John Sheridan, First Assistant Secretary, Australian Government Information Management Office, will talk on "AGIMO’s Vision & Plan for ICT in Government", at an Australian Computer Society meeting in Canberra, 20 September 2011:

ICT Management SIG
AGIMO Update

AGIMO’s Vision & Plan for ICT in Government

John will discuss the status of current whole of government initiatives, including timeframes and outcomes, as well as how government is working with industry to deliver in the future.

John will talk about the role of AGIMO and how it continues to evolve to meet the changing demands of government.

Biography:

John Sheridan

First Assistant Secretar

John is currently the First Assistant Secretary Agency Services within AGIMO. His division’s responsibilities include whole of government matters such as australia.gov.au, Government 2.0, data centre strategy, coordinated procurement, improvements in the ICT industry marketplace, and telecommunications services including ICON, the Ministerial communications and telepresence networks.

John was also in charge of negotiating the Microsoft Volume Sourcing Agreement, valued at over $250m and providing services for over 230,000 staff and to successfully lead the effort to save $1 billion in ICT expenditure over 2009-2013.

Prior to this, John spent 22 in the Australian Army before joining and holding several senior roles within the ICT arm of Defence.

Guide to Open Source Software for Australian Government Agencies

Version 2 of the Australian Government Guide to Open Source Software, has been released by the Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO). The Australian Government's Open Source Software Policy requires agencies to consider open source software. The guide is available in PDF (1.09 MB), Microsoft Word (537 KB) and RTF (941 KB) formats. It is a shame the report was not released in the more open HTML format. Here are some excerpts:

Contents

Foreword 3

Contents 4

1. Introduction 5
2. What is open source software? 6
3. Australian Government Open Source Software Policy 11
4. Procurement of open source software 15
5. Comparing open source and proprietary software 19

Appendix 1: Australian Government Open Source Software Licensing Risk Framework 25

Appendix 2: Links to other resources 55

Appendix 3: Acronyms and definitions 60

Introduction

The Guide to Open Source Software for Australian Government Agencies provides an introduction to open source software. It includes background information on the benefits and risks of using, modifying, distributing and developing open source software and guidance to assist agencies understand, analyse, plan for and deploy open source software.

1.1 Intent

The guide is a stand-alone reference document on open source software; however, agencies are encouraged to read it alongside A Guide to ICT Sourcing for Australian Government Agencies ¹ (Guide to ICT Sourcing). This guide is not a substitute for legal or procurement advice. Any decisions on the use of software, including open source software, or associated services should be made according to the Commonwealth Procurement Guideline s ² and the Australian Government's Open Source Software Policy ³ .

Agencies should be aware that this guide is focused on open source software. It does not provide a complete picture of the benefits and risks of using proprietary software solutions.

1.2 Audience

Although this guide can be considered general background reading for anybody who is inte rested in open source software within government, the primary audiences for this guide are project managers and procurement teams who are sourcing software to meet business requirements. Agency personnel who influence the selection of software may also find this guide useful.

The Australian Government Open Source Software Licensing Risk Framework is designed for ICT specialists.

What is open source software?

Open source software is a popular term in the information and communications technology (ICT) industry, but it can mean different things to different people. This section defines open source software and highlights its benefits.

Agencies should keep in mind that open source software is not intrinsically of higher or lower quality than proprietary software. It is not inherently more or less secure, and it does not necessarily have a higher or lower total cost of ownership.

2.1 Definition of open source software

The Open Source Initiative (OSI) ⁴ , an organisation established to promote open source software, has developed an Open Source Definition (OSD) as follows:

The Open Source Definition

Introduction

Open source doesn't just mean access to the source code. The distribution terms of open-source software must comply with the following criteria:

1. Free Redistribution: The licence shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The licence shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.

2. Source Code: The program must include source code, and must allow distribution in source code as well as compiled form. Where some form of a product is not distributed with source code, there must be a well-publicized means of obtaining the source code for no more than a reasonable reproduction cost preferably, downloading via the Internet without charge. The source code must be the preferred form in which a programmer would modify the program. Deliberately obfuscated source code is not allowed. Intermediate forms such as the output of a preprocessor or translator are not allowed.

3. Derived Works: The licence must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the licence of the original software.

4. Integrity of The Author's Source Code: The licence may restrict source-code from being distributed in modified form only if the licence allows the distribution of "patch file" with the source code for the purpose of modifying the program at build time. The licence must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code. The licence may require derived works to carry a different name or version number from the original software.

5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups: The licence must not discriminate against any person or group of persons.

6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavour:The licence must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavour. For example, it may not restrict the program from being used in a business, or from being used for genetic research.

7. Distribution of Licence: The rights attached to the program must apply to all to whom the program is redistributed without the need for execution of an additional licence by those parties.

8. Licence Must Not Be Specific to a Product: The rights attached to the program must not depend on the program's being part of a particular software distribution. If the program is extracted from that distribution and used or distributed within the terms of the program's licence, all parties to whom the program is redistributed should have the same rights as those that are granted in conjunction with the original software distribution.

9. Licence Must Not Restrict Other Software: The licence must not place restrictions on other software that is distributed along with the licensed software. For example, the licence must not insist that all other programs distributed on the same medium must be open-source software.

10. Licence Must Be Technology-Neutral: No provision of the licence may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface.

Misconceptions

Although open source software often involves a distinctive development and distribution model, it may also be bundled and sold as part of a package with proprietary software. Software can be offered under both open source and proprietary licences. Where software is dual-licenced, agencies should choose the arrangement that best matches their requirements and provides value for money.

Open source software is sometimes confused with public domain software, shareware, community source software and freeware ⁵ . In addition, open source software is often linked with open standards; however, not all open source software products use open standards.

Another common misconception about open source software is that it can always be obtained free of financial cost. When open source software is labelled as 'free', that word refers to the ability of people to read, modify and redistribute the source code of the software, not the cost of the software ⁶ . The definition of open source software does not preclude people from selling the software. However, despite this, open source software is usually available free of upfront costs, although agencies still need to be aware of the total cost of ownership (TCO).

2.2 Development and support of open source software

There are three broad models for open source software development and support:

• Volunteer community. A large proportion of open source software is developed by a community of skilled people who usually communicate online. In this model, there is no specific corporation managing the development process. Support is available through the members of the community, who have forums and other feedback mechanisms to receive requests from users. There is generally no service level agreement available from the community. Popular packages such as the Apache web server and the Linux operating system have been developed using this model.

• Corporate-backed community. Some commercial organisations provide support for open source software. The commercial organisation may choose to create its own community to develop the open source software or they may choose to leverage off an existing product created by a volunteer community. The commercial organisation usually provides support to a defined service level agreement. More than one organisation can provide support for a product, leading to competition based on the quality and price of the service. For example, Oracle's and IBM's web servers are both based on the community-developed Apache.

• Commercial open source. Some open source software is developed or supported by a single corporation. Sun Microsystems (now owned by Oracle) provides the OpenSolaris operating system under this model.

2.3 Benefits of open source software

Open source software has a number of potential benefits. These benefits are not applicable in every instance; however, they can be seen as general characteristics of open source software. Some of these benefits can be realised only when agencies contribute back to the community. In some cases there are risks associated with the benefits, as discussed in Section 4: Procurement of open source software.

Open source software:

• Usually has no upfront payment. The lack of upfront payment may seem to benefit agencies financially; however, as with all software, agencies should consider the total cost of ownership, including all support services that will be required to operate the software over its lifespan.

• Encourages a competitive market for support services. Because the source code is available, it is possible for any software organisation to provide support for an open source product. In addition, customers are able to support the software themselves.

• Encourages a collaborative approach. Open source software encourages an open exchange of ideas, where any user of the software can contribute ideas to improve it. This tends to promote a collaborative approach that may foster innovation.

• Places fewer restrictions on the users of the software. Most open source software licences place fewer restrictions on the users of the software and emphasise respect for the privacy of the users. However, agencies should ensure that they understand the obligation for reciprocity that is included in many open source licences.

• Provides the opportunity for users to take direct control of the maintenance and support of the software. This may be a benefit to agencies that possess the appropriate skill base.

• Allows the opportunity to try the software before committing to it. This will enable agencies to test the viability of the software before fully committing to it.

• May reduce vendor lock-in. As the source code is publicly available, most licences will allow any individual or group to further develop the software without the obligation to support other users, even if the original community discontinues development. Commercial organisations may provide support for an open source package, if there are enough users willing to pay for that service.

• Allows users to view and modify the source code. The ability of users to scrutinise and change the source code of open source software may lead to increased stability and security. It also allows agencies to tailor the software to their own needs.

• Allows users to take advantage of the improved functionality of new releases more rapidly. Many new open source software communities follow the maxim of ‘release early, release often', meaning that users can quickly gain extra functionality for the software.

• Increases interoperability. Many open source software packages use open standards, which tend to lower the costs of integration and improve interoperability ⁷ .

• Usually is modular. Open source software packages are generally modular, which means that changes to one part of the source code is less likely to affect the rest of the software package.

Australian Government Open Source Software Policy

This section describes the principles that underpin the Australian Government's policy in regard to the procurement of open source software and suggests ways that consideration of open source software can be incorporated into procurement processes.

In January 2011, the Australian Government released a policy requiring agencies to consider open source software for all software procurements. The Open Source Sof tware Policy ⁸ , which is available from the Department of Finance and Deregulation website, will apply to any ICT procurement activity initiated after 1 March 2011.

3.1 Principles

The policy directs agencies to comply with three core principles.

Principle 1: Australian Government ICT procurement processes must actively and fairly consider all types of available software.

Australian Government agencies must actively and fairly consider all types of available software (including but not limited to open source software and proprietary software) through their ICT procurement processes. It is recognised there may be areas where open source software is not yet available for consideration. Procurement decisions must be made based on value for money. Procurement decisions should take into account whole-of-life costs, capability, security, scalability, transferability, support and manageabilty requirements.

For a covered procurement (over $80K), agencies are required to include in their procurement plan that open source software will be considered equally alongside proprietary software. Agencies will be required to insert a statement into any Request for Tender that they will consider open source software equally alongside proprietary software. Tender responses will be evaluated under the normal requirements of the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines. For a non-covered procurement (below $80K), agencies are required to document all key decisions, as required by the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines. This includes how they considered open source software suppliers when selecting suppliers to respond to the Select Tender or Request for Quotation.

Principle 2: Suppliers must consider all types of available software when dealing with Australian Government agencies.

Australian Government agencies will require suppliers to consider all types of available software (including but not limited to open source software and proprietary software) when responding to agencies' procurement requests.

Agencies are required to insert this requirement into their tender documentation. Suppliers will need to provide justification outlining their consideration and/or exclusion of open source software in their response to the tender. Agencies will determine compliance with this requirement when assessing tender responses.

Principle 3: Australian Government agencies will actively participate in open source sof tware communities and contribute back where appropriate.

The Australian Government, through AGIMO, will actively seek to keep up-to-date with international best practice in the open source software arena, through engaging with other countries and organisations. Australian Government agencies should also actively participate in open source software communities and contribute back where appropriate.

3.2 Compliance

The policy suggests sample draft clauses designed to assist agencies in complying with the policy. Agencies may choose to draft their own clauses.

The policy provides the following sample clauses:

• for inclusion in procurement plan/procurement documentation

[Agency Name] will actively and fairly consider all types of available software for ICT software procurements. Open source software will be considered equally alongside proprietary software.

• for inclusion in request for quote/select tender checklists

Have you considered all types of available software (including but not limited to open source software and proprietary software)?

• for inclusion in requests for tenders for covered procurements

[Agency Name] encourages suppliers to submit and/or develop open source software for this tender. When responding to this tender, suppliers must demonstrate a willingness to actively consider open source software throughout all stages of procurement, solution design and implementation in order to produce a product that demonstrates value for money and is fit for purpose. This may include incorporating open source software components together with proprietary software components.

In evaluating the tender, [Agency Name] will consider open source software equally alongside proprietary software.

• for inclusion in request for tender assessment checklists

Has the supplier sufficiently demonstrated that they have considered all types of available software (including but not limited to open source and proprietary software)?

Agencies are also encouraged to include a definition of open source software in their procurement documentation.

Procurement of open source software

This section uses the Department of Finance and Deregulation's four-phase ICT sourcing lifecycle to identify issues that agencies should consider when procuring open source software. Further details on the four-phase ICT sourcing lifecycle can be found in A Guide to ICT Sourcing for Australian Government Agencies ⁹ (Guide to ICT Sourcing).

The following sub-sections identify the common issues in software procurement and the specific issues that should be considered when procuring open source software. It is important for agencies to understand the range of different software options available. Agencies need to ensure that they comply with the procurement procedures outlined in the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines, any relevant agency Chief Executive Instructions and any relevant whole-of-government ICT policies.

4.1 Common issues in software procurement

In many aspects, procuring open source software is similar to procuring proprietary software. Agencies must consider the following when procuring either open source software or proprietary software:

• Applicability of the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines . Agencies must always follow the Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines when selecting a software solution.

• Total cost of ownership. When considering value for money, agencies need to take into account the total cost of ownership (TCO), also known as the whole-of-life costs, for use of the software. Even software that can be downloaded and used without cost may have downstream support, maintenance and exit costs. Agencies may need to purchase services for maintenance, support and deployment, and they may also have costs involved with installation, system integration, data conversion and testing. Agencies may also need to pay a developer to modify or integrate the software. Refer to the Guide to ICT Sourcing for more information.

• Matching support and maintenance arrangements to the agency's requirements. Agencies should ensure that the risk profile of their service level agreement for support and maintenance is appropriate for the business criticality of the software. Most agencies will incur some combination of internal staff charges and external support and maintenance charges for either proprietary or open source software.

• Matching product innovation, maturity and roadmap to the agency's requirements. There are variations in the stability, innovation and maturity of both open source and proprietary software packages. Agencies need to take these differences into account when procuring software.

• Aligning with the agency's strategy and architectures. The strategy and architectures of an agency may dictate certain principles, standards and technologies that need to be taken into account when considering new software. Consistent application of an agency's strategy and architectures helps to reduce staff training and ICT support costs.

4.2 Four-phase ICT sourcing lifecycle

The Guide to ICT Sourcing divides the sourcing lifecycle into four phases. The key issues to consider for open source software in each phase are:

• Phase I: Case for change

• Agencies should clarify their business need using their strategy and architectures to define their business case for change. This may include identifying any need for innovation, maturity, support, and integration with existing sof tware or systems.

• Phase II: Decide sourcing strategy

• • Agencies should decide whether there is any justification for limiting their software s election to specific technologies, packages or software models. It should be noted that an approach to an open market will provide the most objective evidence of available options. Agencies should consider the market conditions and TCO, especially support and transition costs.

• Agencies should also consider any whole-of-government ICT policies that may influence their decision making, for example, the ICT Customisation and Bespoke Development Policy ¹⁰ .

• Agencies should be aware that open source software can be sourced 'in house' by downloading open source software from various online repositories. The benefits and risks of 'in house' sourcing should be assessed, including the TCO.

• Phase III: Undertake procurement

• Agencies' procurement processes must be compliance with the Open Source Software Policy .

• Agencies should ensure that there is a software licence management framework, especially if they choose to procure open source software. See Appendix 1: Australian Government Open Source Software Licensing Risk Framework for more information.

• Agencies should be aware that it may be necessary to procure support services separately for open source software.

• Phase IV: Transition and manage

• Agencies should continue to manage their software against the licence cond itions.

• Agencies should also keep up to date on the changing software industry landscape.

Comparing open source and proprietary software

This section highlights some of the key issues that agencies should consider when comparing open source software to proprietary software.

Agencies need to understand the opportunities and risks associated with the different software options. Implementing open source software does not necessarily expose an agency to greater risk than implementing proprietary software; however, there may be a change in the risk profile. Some of the factors that will affect the risk profile are:

• How the agency is using the software. An agency may use the software as supplied, modify it, distribute it or use it as a component of another software implementation.

• The business alignment of the initiative. The Guide to ICT Sourcing provides a framework for assessing initiatives as vital, duty-bound, or discretionary and support. This is based on the relevance of the initiative to the agency's core business.

5.1 Key issues

Agencies need to consider the following when procuring open source or proprietary software solutions.

• Access to source code. By definition, open source software makes the source code available to anyone for viewing, vetting and modification. Proprietary software generally restricts access to and modification of its source code.

• Capital expenditure. Although open source software usually has no upfront cost, the TCO is unlikely to be nil, even if an agency provides in-house support. ¹¹ Proprietary software generally includes an upfront fee, unless the proprietary software is provided as a service ¹² . Agencies should consider the TCO for both proprietary and open source solutions. Considerations include acquisition, deployment, integration, support and maintenance, training and exit costs. However, there may be an opportunity to leverage an agency's existing software investments, for example, if an agency's software uses a particular standard, the cost of integration may be reduced by integrating software that supports the same standard.

• Customisation. Agencies should consider whether they need to customise the software and whether there are any applicable whole-of-government ICT policies (for example, the ICT Customisation and Bespo ke Development Policy ¹³ ). Customisation of open source software can be undertaken either by the agency or by a third party. If agencies choose to customise the software, they should consider the cost of future support, maintenance and upgrades. Agencies should also consider any licensing obligations. If agencies customise open source software and do not contribute the modified product back to the open source software community, this is called code forking. Code forking is discussed in further detail in the next section.

• Development/Governance. Open source software is generally developed by communities of developers who work together online ¹⁴ . These communities may also be supported by commercial organisations. An open source software community with an active and diverse membership, a broad user base, a good governance structure and regular updates is more likely to be responsive to user requests. The corporate history and product roadmap of proprietary software vendors may give agencies an indication of the quality of the vendor. Before an agency commits to using any software package, it should carefully assess the credentials and resources of the developers. The agency should consider whether appropriate development of the software will continue during the expected lifespan of its use by the agency.

• End user. The training necessary for end users should be considered whenever a new software purchase is made or an upgrade is obtained. ¹⁵

• Innovation. The nature of open source software allows agencies to contribute back to the product, which can aid innovation. However, this may affect the TCO of the product, as agencies will need to factor in the cost of contributing back (i.e. staff costs). Historically, proprietary software relies on the vendor to drive innovation.

• Intellectual property. There is a specific exemption for software governed by open source licences in the Australian Government's Statement of Intellectual Property Principles for Australian Government Agencies . This exemption allows the Commonwealth to retain intellectual property in products governed by open source licences. ¹⁶

• Liability . Agencies need to be aware of any liability they may face when modifying and distributing software. Any liability that agencies may face is generally listed in the software licence conditions under disclaimer of liability or disclaimer of warranty.

• Licence obligations. Agencies should be aware of their licensing obligations, including the possibility of the software being dual licensed. Some open source software licences may oblige agencies that modify and distribute the software to contribute all changes back to the open source software community. Proprietary software also comes with its own set of licensing obligations.

• Lock-in. Agencies should be aware of the risks of being locked-in to one type of software. Open source software may align to open industry standards, which can improve interoperability and reduce vendor lock-in. A Guide to ICT Sourcing for Australian Government Agencies ¹⁷ provides a detailed review of this topic. Agencies should also consider the possibility of being locked in due to a lack of support options.

• Maturity and portability. Agencies should ensure that they evaluate the maturity of any software product they are procuring. This includes considering the risks of having to change to a different product in the future.

• Release management. Open source software generally has an increased number of new releases that may have a negative impact in terms of greater requirements for integration testing, release management, bug fixes, and the associated risk management and support tasks.

• Reliability. Agencies should evaluate the reliability of any software product they are procuring. Commonly used open source software products may be more reliable as the community works to select the best improvements and offer them in the next release.

• Restrictions on use. There are typically few or no restrictions on the use of open source software. However, agencies should ensure that they understand the licence conditions before modifying the software. Agencies should also check the support arrangements. Proprietary software will usually have some restrictions on its use, which may include the requirement to pay additional licensing or support costs if there is a change in how the software is to be used.

• Re-Use. Open source software may encourage re-use through the community creation of solutions specifically for government use. However, agencies need to ensure that they have the appropriate governance structures in place for any shared solutions. The ICT Customisation and Be spoke Development Policy provides governance principles for cross-agency solution sharing.

• Security. Open source software allows agencies the opportunity to examine the source code, which may assist in assessing security risks. All software should be scrutinised for its security, governance and deployment arrangements, particularly if it will be used in a high-security area. The Defence Signals Directorate's Evaluated Products List provides a list of products that are certified for specific purposes and specific security levels. ¹⁸

• Support and maintenance. Open source software offers the following options for support and maintenance:

• In-house: Support and maintenance can be provided in-house by the agency.

• Community: Free support can be provided from the open source software community.

• Commercial: Support can be procured from a commercial organisation.

When an agency acquires an open source software solution through an external service provider, it is generally purchasing services and receiving the related software free of charge. There is usually a competitive market for commercial support services for open source software. However, agencies need to assure themselves of the capacity and capability of any organisation claiming to offer support services. Some open source software products may depend on key individuals within a community or a specific vendor to support the product. Open source software that is in widespread use is likely to have more competitive support services. Support and maintenance for proprietary software is generally provided by the vendor or authorised partners, with a certain amount of first level support usually being provided in-house.

• Warranties. Open source software that is downloaded free generally does not offer warranties. However, open source software that is procured from a commercial vendor will generally come with similar warranties to proprietary software.

5.2 Beyond use: code forking and reciprocity

This section gives further information on two issues that apply when modifying or developing open source software.

Code forking

Code forking occurs when agencies make changes to the code of open source software without publishing the code back to the software's development community. The fork is the split between the agency's version of the software and the version published by the community. Any further changes made by either the agency or the community will increase the fork. This can make it difficult for the agency to upgrade to a new published version, as the agency would have to reapply all its changes. This risk may be mitigated by contributing modified source code back to the open source software community.

Code forking is similar to customising proprietary software packages. Customising commercial products can also create a future liability for the agency, as upgrading to the next supported version of the package may be more expensive and time consuming due to the customisation.

• The benefits, costs and risks of customising should be included in the business case for any software initiative. Agencies should be aware of whole-of-government ICT policies that may govern their ability to customise software, such as the ICT Customisation and Bespoke Development Policy ¹⁹ . Agencies should also ensure that they have the appropriate skill base to manage the development and ongoing maintenance of the forked software.

Agencies working with open source software have the option to publish changes back to the development community. Depending on the licence, they may also be obligated to publish any changes that have been distributed. Should these changes be accepted by the community and integrated into the base product, alignment is maintained with the published version. Agencies need to consider the implications of contributing ...

From: Australian Government Guide to Open Source Software, Australian Government Information Management Office , Version 2.0, June 2011

Draft revised Guide to Australian Government Policy on Open Source Software

A Draft revised Guide to Australian Government Policy on Open Source Software was released in march. Comments close on Friday 15 April 2011 and can be made on the AGIMO Blog. The policy is good. But it is a shame AGIMO used Microsoft® Office Word 2007 to create the document in PDF format. Would have been a nice touch to to use open source software to create the document and then distribute as an easy to read Web page.

Also it would have been good to release the document under a creative commons licence in accordance with Australian Government policy. As it is there is no licence stated in the document and so presumably commonwealth copyright applies, prohibiting free use of the document.

It would also be good if AGIMO could use web addresses of less than 75 characters for their documents, so they can be easily used.

Tweeting for Your Country

Greetings from BarCamp Canberra 2011 in in Canberra, where John Sheridan, First Assistant Secretary, Austrlaian Government Information Management Office is talking about how he uses social networking in Government (AGIMO are sponsoring the event). After giving good advice on what to say (and not say) and how to use it generally (there is a "AGIMO Government 2.0 Primer"), he went on to mention "Yammer" for internal discussion. He also mentioned the value of helping people use social networking.

Data Centre as a Service

The Australian Government Information Management Office (AGIMO), has issued a "Data Centre as a Service Discussion Paper" and invited industry comment. The Data Centre as a Service (DCaaS) facility would provide a shared data centre for smaller agencies (5o spend less than $2M a year on ICT). It is planned to have the service available in the second half of 2011, so this will have to be an existing data centre, not a new building.

As well as the idea of DCaaS, which is included in the "Australian Government Data Centre Strategy 2010‑2025", the way comment from industry is invited is of interest. As well as confidential comments by email, industry is invited to post to the AGIMO blog. There is no separate "paper" and "questionnaire" provided (no use of PDF). The paper is published as a blog entry with space to type answers to questions included.

When at the Commonwealth Schools Commission I programmed a shared mainframe computer system provided by Special Minister of State. In the main this worked well. There were some problems because SMOS was another government agency and so there was no way to legally enforce a service agreement, but if you have to take your supplier to court, you have failed.

My suggestion would be for AGIMO to tender for a basic hosting service, with add-ons as options. Later consider a cloud service. It should be noted that use of shared web based applications could greatly reduce the amount of computing equipment required and so the size of the data centre needed. My experience suggests this would reduce equipment requirements by a factor of 100, through more efficient software, more efficient data storage and sharing the hardware. In place of a data centre the size of a football field, one the size of a traditional Australian suburban quarter-acre block of land would be sufficient.

Here are my answers to the questions asked:

Question 1 of 5: Is this scope realistic and will it achieve worthwhile results? Should the scope of DCaaS include applications, and if so, which ones?

The scope is realistic. However, the short time-frame will exclude new builds.The DCaaS should exclude applications, which could be the subject of a separate process, as it raises many more issues.

Question 2 of 5: Are there any other suggestions that you think should be included?

The service should provide for at least two physical locations more than 300 km apart, to allow for backup.

Question 3 of 5: Why would one of these options be better than any other? What option would you propose?

Basic hosting would be the most suitable place to start, as it is the easiest.

Disaster Recovery Hosting & Services should be provided primarily by having at least two sites.

Full Outsourced Services, Full Managed Services should be separate services, available as an option through separate contracts not necessarily via the data centre provider.

Scalable ICT Delivery (Cloud) should be considered separately. The software issues are considerable. AGIMO should consider a suite of shared web based applications for smaller agencies.

Question 4 of 5: If presented to the market, which of the offerings listed above might your organisation bid for?

1. a) Hosting
2. b) Disaster Recovery Hosting & Services
3. c) Full Outsourced Services
4. d) Full Managed Services
5. e) Scalable ICT Delivery

AGIMO might be surprised by the large number of organisations which can provide these services. Even scalable ICT delivery is now something available using free open source software within the capabilities of the average university ICT graduate.

Question 5 of 5: What factors do you sees as leading to success or failure in the provision of DCaaS to Government. This may include contract terms, service level agreements, data security and mobility, intellectual property or data ownership.

Trying to provide more than basic hosting would make the project very complex and likely to fail. Better to start simple. It is suggested that basic hosting with at least two locations for disaster recovery be provided.

It is suggested that Full Outsourced Services and Full Managed Services be considered later as options. However, for smaller agencies it might be feasible to then step directly to a cloud based service, providing shared web based applications for agencies. AGIMO could provide some basic services for free, such as an office application suite, a social networking and email service for all public servants, and then offer additional services, such as HR, finance and recruitment management, as an optional extra paid for by corporate credit card.

PDF Education Sessions for Government

Adobe are running a series of education sessions on "PDF Accessibility Education Sessions for the Australian Government" in March 2011. These are to help Australian Public Servants with PDF authoring skills, after an AGIMO/Vision Australia study which was critical of the accessibility of Portable Document Format documents for people with a disability.

In my view the main problem is not with PDF itself but the design of the documents. Better training for document designers will help. But this training need not be specific to PDF. The same techniques will work with other formats, although each document format has its own idiosyncrasies.

In line with Principle 7 "Open and accessible formats online" of the "Draft Principles on Open Public Sector Information" from the Australian Information Commissioner, I suggest it would be better for the Australian Government to concentrate on accessible web pages and make that the primary format for government publishing. PDF versions could still be produced, but automatically generated from the web version, but just as a format for printing. E-book formats based on web technology could also be provided as an alternative to PDF, with little additional effort.

ps: While educating public servants on accessibility is a worthwhile aim, the Department of Finance and Deregulation has exceeded its authority in endorsing this Adobe activity. The name of the Department of Finance and Deregulation, and the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, are displayed below a banner headline on the Adobe web page about the PDF sessions. The page is marked "Copyright © 2011 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All rights reserved". This is contrary to the guidelines for the use of the Arms.

Australian Whole-of-Government Common Operating Environment

The Australian Department of Finance and Deregulation, has issued a "Whole-of-Government Common Operating Environment Policy" (WofG COE). The most controversial part of this is the mandating of the Office Open XML file format (as used by Microsoft Office), rather than the Open Document Format (as used by OpenOffice.org and other office packages).

National Archives of Australia developed its Xena open source archiving software to convert documents to ODF format for electronic archiving. Unless Archives decides to change the format used, each document will need to be converted from OOXML to ODF for long term storage. Prudence requires the original version of a document to be kept, along with the converted version, so this will increase the amount of storage needed.

However, what might be more significant is the lack of web standards from the COE. An "Internet Browser" is included as a standard application, but there are no versions of web document formats mandated, such as HTML or CSS. Also there is no mention of ebooks.

In my view the use of office applications suites, be they producing OOXML or ODF, are of questionable value. These applications encourage authors to create poorly structured, hard to read documents which waste system resources.

The COE also specifies the ISO/IEC 32000-1:2008 version of PDF (equivalent to Adobe PDF 1.7). The "Australian Government’s study into the Accessibility of the Portable Document Format for people with a disability" recommended the continued use of alternate formats to PDF. In my view packaged web formats such as the ePub ebook format, would be preferable to PDF.

Australian Government Cloud Computing Strategic Direction Paper

A draft "Australian Government Cloud Computing Strategic Direction Paper" has been released for comment (deadline 31 January 2011). The document is 52 pages long.

Australian Government Cloud Computing Strategic Direction Paper: Opportunities and applicability for use by the Australian Government

Draft for consultation

Table of Contents

CLOUD COMPUTING STRATEGIC DIRECTION PAPER 1

Executive Summary 5

1. Introduction 7

1.1 Why is an Australian Government Cloud Computing Strategy required? 7

1.2 Objective 9

1.3 Audience 9

2. What is Cloud Computing? 11

2.1 Types of Cloud Computing 13

2.2 Cloud Service Capability 15

3. Potential Risks and Issues of Cloud Computing 16

4. Potential Business Benefits of Cloud Computing for Australian Government Agencies 19

5. Potential Opportunities of Cloud Computing for Australian Government Agencies 22

6. Proposed Australian Government Cloud Computing Policy 25

6.1 Draft Policy Statement 25

6.2 Vision 25

6.3 Key Drivers for Adoption 25

6.4 Strategy Overview 25

6.5 Deliverables 27

Attachment 1: Related Documents 35

Attachment 2: Environmental Scan 37

Attachment 3: Prominent Global / Public Cloud Vendors 40

Attachment 4: Definitions of Cloud Computing 43

Attachment 5: Terminology 47

FIGURES

Figure 1: Gartner Hype Cycle for Cloud Computing, 2010 12

Figure 2: Visual Model of NIST Working Definition of Cloud Computing 37

Executive Summary

“Cloud computing is a new way of delivering computing resources, not a new technology.”¹

The Australian Government Cloud Computing Strategic Direction Paper describes the whole of government policy position on cloud computing. The strategy states that: agencies can choose cloud-based services if demonstrating value for money, fitness for purpose and are adequately secure; provides guidance for agencies on what cloud computing is; and some of the issues and benefits of cloud computing that agencies need to be aware of.

The paper recognises that the public cloud is still evolving, particularly in areas such as security and privacy. These issues need to be adequately resolved before critical government services can be transitioned to the cloud. As a result, the paper outlines three streams of work:

• Stream One – provides agencies with guidance and documentation.

• Stream Two – encourages agencies to adopt public cloud services for public facing “unclassified” government services and to undertake proof of concept studies to fully understand the risks of the cloud environment.

• Stream Three – encourages a strategic approach to cloud. This work is dependent upon greater clarity around projects commissioned under the Data Centre Strategy.

1 ENISA: Cloud computing: benefits, risks and recommendations for information security, European Network and Information Security Agency. ...

From: Australian Government Cloud Computing Strategic Direction Paper, Department of Finance and Deregulation, 7 January 2011

Government study recommends accessible alternatives to PDF

"The Australian Government’s study into the Accessibility of the Portable Document Format for people with a disability" recommends the continued use of alternate formats to PDF. While in theory it is possible to create accessible PDF, in practice this does not work well enough to be relied on and so alternatives, typically HTML is required. It should be noted that the Department of Finance are practicing what they preach, releasing the report in the form of a set of web pages, as well as PDF.

One suggestion I would make would be to move the PDF link to below the table of contents for the web version of such documents. The average viewer is likely to click on the first link they see on a web page. They would then download megabytes of the full report in PDF, before realising there is a more suitable web summary available. The Finance Department should also be commended for releasing the report with a open access Creative Commons licence.

I will be covering some of this in the course "Electronic Data Management" (COMP7420), starting at ANU February 2011.

Publication Summary

When the Australian Government released the Website Accessibility National Transition Strategy in June 2010, it noted that “New technology has huge potential to make life better for people with disability, but we need to make sure that it is as easy to use as possible for all members of our community.” Online accessibility depends on the manner in which documents are presented and how they interact with the assistive technologies that are increasingly available.

The Portable Document Format (PDF), first created by Adobe Systems in 1993, now in its ninth version, is very widely used for online documents. While it has wide utility, its suitability for accessibility purposes has been criticised. In 2010, AGIMO, working with Vision Australia, and with the
cooperation of Adobe, undertook a study of the Portable Document Format’s accessibility capabilities. The study’s scope was focussed on PDF and was designed to increase understanding of its strengths and weaknesses.

Not surprisingly, the study has found that while accessibility of the Portable Document Format is improving, like most tools, it cannot compensate for poor design. Content authors need to design accessibility into their documents from the outset.

The Web Accessibility National Transition Strategy provides the necessary guidance to ensure the needs of all are reflected online. The study’s main and supplementary reports can be found below. The AGIMO Blog provides further details of this matter and the ability to participate in an online discussion. ...

Table of Contents

Executive summary
Key findings
User consultations (Vision Australia)
Public online consultation (AGIMO)
Technical evaluation
User evaluations
Conclusions
Introduction
About WCAG 2.0
About the Portable Document Format
The legislative context in Australia
Computer use by people with a disability
Phase one: user consultation - the user perspective
Focus Groups
Encountering PDF files
Problems using PDF files
Workaround solutions
Assistive technologies and PDF files Interaction with Adobe Reader
Public online consultation
Phase two: technical evaluation - the technical perspective
Common assistive
technologies used in Australia
Vendor support for assistive technologies
Technical testing
Exclusions
Phase two - technical evaluation results
Phase three: user evaluations - the lived experience
Participants
The PDF test documents
User evaluation tasks
User evaluation result (measure of effectiveness)
Acceptance of time (measure of efficiency)
Satisfaction ratings (measure of satisfaction)
Problems experienced by users
Overall combined accessibility testing results
Study approach and methodology
Focus groups
Online consultation
Technical evaluation
User experience evaluations
Appendix
Submissions to the public consultation
Organisations providing assistive technology data
Glossary

Supplementary Report

Supplementary report
Phase one – user consultations
Phase two – technical evaluation
Phase three – user evaluations
User evaluation test results by assistive technology
Detailed test results by assistive technology
PAC Mate
JAWS 9 & 10
NVDA 2009.1
SATOGO 3.0
Window-Eyes 7
MAGic 10
ZoomText 9.14
Read Out Loud (Adobe Reader 9)
Read & Write Gold 9
Dragon Professional 10.1
Operating System (OS) configuration
Auslan ...

From: "The Australian Government’s study into the Accessibility of the Portable Document Format for people with a disability" , by Vision Austrlaia, for the Australian Government Information Management Office, Department of Finance and Deregulation, November 2010

Little Progress on Green in Government ICT Report

Thanks to Dr Idris Sulaiman for identifying the few mentions of sustainability of ICT in the "Review Independent Review of Implementation of the ICT Reform Program" by Dr Ian Reinecke for the Australian Government:

Chapter 7. Sustainability (p.29)

7.1 Sustainability plan

Implementation:

The Department of Energy, Water, Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA) was tasked with developing in conjunction with Finance and other agencies a whole-of-Government ICT Sustainability Plan. The plan was intended to identify appropriate standards to be adopted for all ICT purchases and to set out whole-of-Government targets against which agencies should report.

Large agencies were required to develop ICT efficiency plans that should include the measurement of data centre energy efficiency and include energy usage targets. These agencies would undertake periodic ICT energy assessments and their plans would be assessed by DEWHA, which would report to Ministers on the outcomes.

Effectiveness:

A whole-of-Government sustainability plan was prepared for SIGB in late 2009. The plan aimed to align Government acquisition and use of ICT with its overall sustainability agenda by identifying mandatory environmental standards to be applied in ICT procurement. A process to set ICT energy consumption targets was outlined including measurement of ICT energy intensity. Agencies with an annual ICT spend of more than $30M were required to develop IT energy management plans; all had completed their IT energy management plans by May 2010. Industry consultations occurred during preparation of the plan and submissions were received; overall feedback expressed strong support for Government leadership in ICT sustainability.

7.2 ICT quick wins

Implementation:

The Gershon Report recommended that a list of possible quick wins to assist ICT sustainability be prepared including software controlled energy savings of personal computers.

Effectiveness:

A list of Green ICT quick win initiatives was developed by Finance and DEWHA and made available on the AGIMO web site and a Green ICT Procurement kit is due for release in 2010. It was estimated that the Australian Government could improve its energy performance by up to 25 per cent through to mid- 2015 on current consumption levels. (Page 29)

More than PDF needed for accessibility

Gian Wild talked about "PDFs and accessibility - AGIMO review" at the Web Standards Group meeting in Canberra, today. At the previous WSG Meeting, an AGIMO representative expressed the view that it was not feasible to make PDF, RTF or MS Word files accessible and so agencies should provide information as accessible web pages. This would not be a great change from the current formal AGMIO advice: "Agencies are reminded that it is still a requirement to publish an alternative to all PDF documents (preferably in HTML)." The formal release of the AGIMO PDF Accessibility Review, was due in mid-2010 (and is now four months late).

My view is that while in theory PDF could be made accessible, but in practice this is so hard to do it is not worth the trouble. It is simpler to create an accessible web page with HTML. Ideally a good quality HTML page can replace PDF.

Gian started with an introduction to web accessibility issues. She pointed out that WCAG 2 guidelines do not cover cognitive disabilities (including dyslexia, aphasia). Also colour blindness is common. Few people are completely blind (that is not being able to see any light). Many use magnifiers to make the text larger. Also "screen readers" do not cope well with Flash and JavaScript. She showed an example of text transposed to demonstrate what a person with dyslexia is faced with. She pointed out that physical disabilities have difficulties with keyboards and/or mice.

Gian pointed out that Youtube now has automated text captioning. The creator uploads a file of the text and Youtube automatically matches this to the audio.

Gian the went on to discuss the Disability Discrimination ACT and the precedent set by the SOCOG case I was an expert witness for. The Australian Human Rights Commission recommends WCAG version 1 (version 2 to follow). Federal agencies are required to comply with WCAG version 1 now with version 2 to follow. The Australian Human Rights Commission gets more complaints about PDF than any other format.

There were 40 submissions to the AGIMO PDF review. Vision Australia found tagged PDF difficult to use and lacking in support from assistive technology. AGMIO looked at best practice advice from Adobe. Assistive technology vendors advised they were reluctant to support tagged PDF as so people use it. As a result AGIMO will not define as accessible and will require an alternative format.

However, tagging is useful, as for example for text to speech. What Gian seemed to be saying was that a simple text PDF document was easier to navigate than a complicated web site with lots of menus. However, a simple web page might be even better.

Gian demonstrated to use of a text to speech system (in this case BrowseAloud.com). She pointed out that these systems can be useful for people who have a physical disability as they can place the pointer over some text to be read without having to click. One feature of the software is a dictionary. It occurs to me that some of these features and guidelines could be of value to students, particularly with those learning in a second language.

Gian suggested that AGIMO and other governments should fund an accessibility toolkit for WCAG 2, to translate the esoteric language of the guideline into something web designers can understand and use. Gian also pointed out that many simple accessibility tips (such as "use simple language") in WCAG 1 was removed from WCAG 2. These sort of useful tips could be included in a government sponsored cookbook.

One interesting option I suggest is the use of e-book formats. These could provide a useful alternative to PDF for large government reports. The EPUB e-book format is based on HTML. It should therefore be possbible to create an e-book which looks good online, prints like a conventiaonal report and could be easily also provided as an accessible web site. This would remove the need for PDF and web versions.

ps: The meeting was at the Geoscience Austrlaia building in Symonston. This is worth a visit just for the display on geology in the foyer, the library, map shop and cafe.